Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
Electronics Repair (sci.electronics.repair) Discussion of repairing electronic equipment. Topics include requests for assistance, where to obtain servicing information and parts, techniques for diagnosis and repair, and annecdotes about success, failures and problems. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
Posted to sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
On Wed, 7 Jun 2017 19:13:51 +1000, Clifford Heath
wrote: On 07/06/17 17:58, wrote: Am I missing something, (like gold plating) Or do they really think someone is stupid enough to pay $100 for a USED 1gb flash drive? It depends. How many Bitcoins does it contain? Wanna explain that.... This is about the 3rd time I've heard that expression "bit coins" in the last month. What the heck does that mean? I'm not up on some of this stuff that is probably another facebook gag, and I would not touch facebook with someone else's computer on the end of a 10 foot pole. I was thinking that this flash drive contains some pirated software though, like a Windows installer or something, but reading the docs on that webpage, no one would know what was on it, so what is the point. And for $100 you can nearly buy a retail version of Windows 10 (I think). I recall seeing it at Walmart for $129 a year ago. Not that it matters, I'll stick with Windows XP and even Win98. I use both. Everytime I have to use the WIn 10 computers at the local library, I have to ask WHY? I can do the same things in XP with a lot less bloat, less CPU power, less hassle, and less much less tracking. Anyhow, I can only think that this item is a joke. But it should have been posted on April 1. Ebay dont seen to care about prices. As long as an item fits their terms of service, it's listed. (sensible or not). |
#3
Posted to sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
wrote on 6/7/2017 2:27 PM:
On Wed, 7 Jun 2017 19:13:51 +1000, Clifford Heath wrote: On 07/06/17 17:58, wrote: Am I missing something, (like gold plating) Or do they really think someone is stupid enough to pay $100 for a USED 1gb flash drive? It depends. How many Bitcoins does it contain? Wanna explain that.... This is about the 3rd time I've heard that expression "bit coins" in the last month. What the heck does that mean? I'm not up on some of this stuff that is probably another facebook gag, and I would not touch facebook with someone else's computer on the end of a 10 foot pole. I was thinking that this flash drive contains some pirated software though, like a Windows installer or something, but reading the docs on that webpage, no one would know what was on it, so what is the point. And for $100 you can nearly buy a retail version of Windows 10 (I think). I recall seeing it at Walmart for $129 a year ago. Not that it matters, I'll stick with Windows XP and even Win98. I use both. Everytime I have to use the WIn 10 computers at the local library, I have to ask WHY? I can do the same things in XP with a lot less bloat, less CPU power, less hassle, and less much less tracking. Anyhow, I can only think that this item is a joke. But it should have been posted on April 1. Ebay dont seen to care about prices. As long as an item fits their terms of service, it's listed. (sensible or not). Not trying to give you a hard time, but where have you been for the last decade? Bit coin is a digital currency backed by nothing but what others will pay for it. While it has no real basis for its value, it is the same as other investments like art or gold, worth what someone will give you for it. Bitcoin has been significant in the news for some time now being reported as used as payment for criminal activity and of more importance to users, one bitcoin exchange which was supposedly hacked loosing some millions of dollars worth of currency with no way to trace it... which I found odd since they can track bitcoin. That's also why it's odd that it would be used for criminal actions, it is traceable! Whatever. I'm happy with the folding stuff. -- Rick C |
#4
Posted to sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
On Wed, 07 Jun 2017 14:27:48 -0400, wrote:
On Wed, 7 Jun 2017 19:13:51 +1000, Clifford Heath wrote: It depends. How many Bitcoins does it contain? Wanna explain that.... This is about the 3rd time I've heard that expression "bit coins" in the last month. What the heck does that mean? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin |
#5
Posted to sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
On 6/7/2017 1:27 PM, wrote:
This is about the 3rd time I've heard that expression "bit coins" in the last month. What the heck does that mean? Hardly a day goes by where you don't once again prove how incredibly ignorant you are. They have nothing to do with Facebook. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin -- Jeff-1.0 wa6fwi http://www.foxsmercantile.com --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com |
#6
Posted to sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
On 08/06/17 06:06, rickman wrote:
Bit coin is a digital currency backed by nothing but what others will pay for it. Like every other currency. While it has no real basis for its value, Like ever other currency. it is the same as other investments like art or gold, worth what someone will give you for it. Like every other currency. Currency has value because of the real stuff you can buy with it. You can buy real stuff with it, because the seller accepts its value, because they can buy stuff with it. Exactly the same is true with bitcoins, but unlike cash, no physical artefact needs to cross a border. it would be used for criminal actions, it is traceable! The bitcoins are traceable, but the owner is not. Like cash. |
#7
Posted to sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
On Wed, 07 Jun 2017 13:08:41 -0700, Mike Paff wrote:
On Wed, 07 Jun 2017 14:27:48 -0400, wrote: On Wed, 7 Jun 2017 19:13:51 +1000, Clifford Heath wrote: It depends. How many Bitcoins does it contain? Wanna explain that.... This is about the 3rd time I've heard that expression "bit coins" in the last month. What the heck does that mean? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin Thanks for the link. I now know I will avoid bitcoins. Sounds like a big game and likely a scam,or at least someone profits from it, and everyone else pays a sucker fee. |
#8
Posted to sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
On 08/06/17 13:52, wrote:
On Wed, 07 Jun 2017 13:08:41 -0700, Mike Paff wrote: On Wed, 07 Jun 2017 14:27:48 -0400, wrote: On Wed, 7 Jun 2017 19:13:51 +1000, Clifford Heath wrote: It depends. How many Bitcoins does it contain? Wanna explain that.... This is about the 3rd time I've heard that expression "bit coins" in the last month. What the heck does that mean? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin Thanks for the link. I now know I will avoid bitcoins. You have your head in the sand. I'm sure the early trading economies encountered more than a few people like you when they started to move from IOUs to exchangeable tokens. "Why would I give you these nice vegetables for this inscribed chunk of clay, or that paper?" That's all cash is, tokens. That's all Bitcoins are, too. |
#9
Posted to sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
wrote on 6/7/2017 11:52 PM:
On Wed, 07 Jun 2017 13:08:41 -0700, Mike Paff wrote: On Wed, 07 Jun 2017 14:27:48 -0400, wrote: On Wed, 7 Jun 2017 19:13:51 +1000, Clifford Heath wrote: It depends. How many Bitcoins does it contain? Wanna explain that.... This is about the 3rd time I've heard that expression "bit coins" in the last month. What the heck does that mean? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin Thanks for the link. I now know I will avoid bitcoins. Sounds like a big game and likely a scam,or at least someone profits from it, and everyone else pays a sucker fee. It's not a scam. It has been around for a long time now. There is long term growth in the value of bit coin, which is not required for it to be useful. That's not to say there aren't scammers out there to use bit coin in some way that will rip you off, but you don't need bit coin for that to happen. But because there is nothing to set a value on bit coin, the value can go up and down with events that cast it in a good or poor light. -- Rick C |
#10
Posted to sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
On 8/06/2017 4:27 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 7 Jun 2017 19:13:51 +1000, Clifford Heath wrote: On 07/06/17 17:58, wrote: Am I missing something, (like gold plating) Or do they really think someone is stupid enough to pay $100 for a USED 1gb flash drive? It depends. How many Bitcoins does it contain? Wanna explain that.... This is about the 3rd time I've heard that expression "bit coins" in the last month. What the heck does that mean? **Do you live in a cave? On Mars? Bitcoins have been in the mainstream media for several years. I'm not up on some of this stuff that is probably another facebook gag, and I would not touch facebook with someone else's computer on the end of a 10 foot pole. I was thinking that this flash drive contains some pirated software though, like a Windows installer or something, but reading the docs on that webpage, no one would know what was on it, so what is the point. And for $100 you can nearly buy a retail version of Windows 10 (I think). I recall seeing it at Walmart for $129 a year ago. **A 1GB flash drive is worth, maybe, a Dollar. A 1TB flash drive is worth more than $100.00. Why are you banging on about a flash drive that is usually a giveaway item? I receive them, free, from some of my suppliers who no longer publish parts catalogues on paper. Not that it matters, I'll stick with Windows XP and even Win98. I use both. Everytime I have to use the WIn 10 computers at the local library, I have to ask WHY? I can do the same things in XP with a lot less bloat, less CPU power, less hassle, and less much less tracking. **My Windows 10 laptop boots in less than 30 seconds, is speedy and easy to use. It is MUCH faster than any Win XP machine I've owned. All done without an SSD too. Anyhow, I can only think that this item is a joke. But it should have been posted on April 1. Ebay dont seen to care about prices. As long as an item fits their terms of service, it's listed. (sensible or not). **I suspect your posts are April 1st ones. A 1GB flash drive. Bah. I sweep them out with the trash. Not worth bending over to pick up. -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au |
#11
Posted to sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
On Thu, 8 Jun 2017 15:39:57 +1000, Clifford Heath
wrote: Thanks for the link. I now know I will avoid bitcoins. You have your head in the sand. I'm sure the early trading economies encountered more than a few people like you when they started to move from IOUs to exchangeable tokens. "Why would I give you these nice vegetables for this inscribed chunk of clay, or that paper?" That's all cash is, tokens. That's all Bitcoins are, too. Yea, but cash is controlled by the government, making it safe. Not that the government is always right, but unless the economy collapses, a dollar will always be worth a dollar and can be used anywhere in the US and many other parts of the world. |
#12
Posted to sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 07:01:08 +1000, Trevor Wilson
wrote: **My Windows 10 laptop boots in less than 30 seconds, is speedy and easy to use. It is MUCH faster than any Win XP machine I've owned. All done without an SSD too. It boots that fast because it never really shut down. Try disabling Windoze 10 "fast startup" feature and time how long it takes when it has to load everything from scratch: https://in.answers.acer.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/37059/~/windows-10%3A-enable-or-disable-fast-startup -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
#13
Posted to sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
On 10/06/2017 3:20 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 07:01:08 +1000, Trevor Wilson wrote: **My Windows 10 laptop boots in less than 30 seconds, is speedy and easy to use. It is MUCH faster than any Win XP machine I've owned. All done without an SSD too. It boots that fast because it never really shut down. Try disabling Windoze 10 "fast startup" feature and time how long it takes when it has to load everything from scratch: https://in.answers.acer.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/37059/~/windows-10%3A-enable-or-disable-fast-startup **Are you suggesting that Windows 10 is, somehow, magically operating on my laptop? A laptop, I might add, that has the battery removed, because I only run it on mains power? AFAIK, when I switch on a laptop, which has no battery connected, then that qualifies as a 'cold boot'. -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au |
#14
Posted to sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
Trevor Wilson wrote on 6/10/2017 12:41 AM:
On 10/06/2017 3:20 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote: On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 07:01:08 +1000, Trevor Wilson wrote: **My Windows 10 laptop boots in less than 30 seconds, is speedy and easy to use. It is MUCH faster than any Win XP machine I've owned. All done without an SSD too. It boots that fast because it never really shut down. Try disabling Windoze 10 "fast startup" feature and time how long it takes when it has to load everything from scratch: https://in.answers.acer.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/37059/~/windows-10%3A-enable-or-disable-fast-startup **Are you suggesting that Windows 10 is, somehow, magically operating on my laptop? A laptop, I might add, that has the battery removed, because I only run it on mains power? AFAIK, when I switch on a laptop, which has no battery connected, then that qualifies as a 'cold boot'. My laptop manages to "cold boot" from the saved image on the hard drive that was saved the last time I turned it off. I think they call that hibernate rather than sleep. But I believe what Jeff is talking about is something similar, but automatic rather than you having to set it to hibernate when powering off. I'm using Win8. -- Rick C |
#15
Posted to sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
On Sat, 10 Jun 2017 14:41:43 +1000, Trevor Wilson
wrote: On 10/06/2017 3:20 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote: On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 07:01:08 +1000, Trevor Wilson wrote: **My Windows 10 laptop boots in less than 30 seconds, is speedy and easy to use. It is MUCH faster than any Win XP machine I've owned. All done without an SSD too. It boots that fast because it never really shut down. Try disabling Windoze 10 "fast startup" feature and time how long it takes when it has to load everything from scratch: https://in.answers.acer.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/37059/~/windows-10%3A-enable-or-disable-fast-startup **Are you suggesting that Windows 10 is, somehow, magically operating on my laptop? Well, yes. You stated: "**My Windows 10 laptop boots in less than 30 seconds..." which suggests that your laptop is under the control of Microsoft Windoze 10. Further resistance is futile. You have been assimilated. A laptop, I might add, that has the battery removed, because I only run it on mains power? Unless you have the power management set to reduce the CPU speed when running on battery, your laptop should operate at the same speed on either battery or mains power. I've run my own benchmarks comparing XP and Win 10. However, the comparison isn't fair. I never could get 64 bit Windoze XP to work reliably, so all my XP machines are running 32 bit. Most of my Win 10 machines are running 64 bit. The machines that were intentionally or surreptitiously upgraded ran a mix of 32 and 64 bit Win 10. The difference in speed between 32 and 64 bit Win 10 was sufficient for me to justify loading 64bit Win 10 from scratch. So, if you're comparing the speed of XP and Win 10, you're comparing a 32 bit XP, which is limited to 3.5GB of RAM, with 64 bit Win 10 which can use far more RAM. Apples and oranges. AFAIK, when I switch on a laptop, which has no battery connected, then that qualifies as a 'cold boot'. Methinks we have different definitions of "cold boot". I'm referring to the time it takes from starting the laptop from a power off state to when it is ready to use. When you disable "fast startup", a similar hardware XP machine should boot at approximately the same speed, mostly depending on how many background programs need to be started. What the "fast startup" feature does (which incidentally is enabled by default in Windoze 10) only partly shuts down when you turn off the computah. This explains it better than I can: https://www.howtogeek.com/243901/the-pros-and-cons-of-windows-10s-fast-startup-mode/ Windoze 8.1 has the same features (which incidentally are disabled by default) but with slightly different feature names: http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/windows-and-office/how-windows-8-hybrid-shutdown-fast-boot-feature-works/ Opinions vary on whether "fast startup" is a good or bad thing. In general, I find it beneficial and harmless on most systems. However, about once a month, I get a customer call for various boot time errors that are eventually traced to "fast startup" and are cleared by doing a full shutdown. I also have similar problems when running Win 10 inside a virtual machine (both VMware and Virtual Box). So far, nobody has lost data, so I think you're safe to leave it running[1]. Nine different ways to do a full (and other) shutdowns in Win 10: https://www.tenforums.com/tutorials/7418-shut-down-computer-windows-10-a.html Note that if you have "fast startup" enabled, and turn off your computah, you cannot force it to do a full boot. You have to do the full shutdown first, before it will load everything from scratch. If you need more detail, please ask. It's midnight and I've had a long day which included living on party food. I expect to survive but right now, my brain is almost off-line. [1] I turn off "fast startup" and sell my customers an SSD if they want more speed. In general, an SSD will make everything go 3X to 5X faster. -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
#16
Posted to sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
Thursday, June 8 2017 3:39PM, Clifford Heath wrote:
Thanks for the link. I now know I will avoid bitcoins. You have your head in the sand. I'm sure the early trading economies encountered more than a few people like you when they started to move from IOUs to exchangeable tokens. "Why would I give you these nice vegetables for this inscribed chunk of clay, or that paper?" That's all cash is, tokens. That's all Bitcoins are, too. But dogs can't smell bitcoins. |
#17
Posted to sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
On 10/06/2017 5:18 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sat, 10 Jun 2017 14:41:43 +1000, Trevor Wilson wrote: On 10/06/2017 3:20 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote: On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 07:01:08 +1000, Trevor Wilson wrote: **My Windows 10 laptop boots in less than 30 seconds, is speedy and easy to use. It is MUCH faster than any Win XP machine I've owned. All done without an SSD too. It boots that fast because it never really shut down. Try disabling Windoze 10 "fast startup" feature and time how long it takes when it has to load everything from scratch: https://in.answers.acer.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/37059/~/windows-10%3A-enable-or-disable-fast-startup **Are you suggesting that Windows 10 is, somehow, magically operating on my laptop? Well, yes. You stated: "**My Windows 10 laptop boots in less than 30 seconds..." which suggests that your laptop is under the control of Microsoft Windoze 10. Further resistance is futile. You have been assimilated. A laptop, I might add, that has the battery removed, because I only run it on mains power? Unless you have the power management set to reduce the CPU speed when running on battery, your laptop should operate at the same speed on either battery or mains power. **You're not reading what I wrote. I do not operate my laptop with the battery installed. It operates only on mains power. It cold boots in around 30 seconds. I've run my own benchmarks comparing XP and Win 10. However, the comparison isn't fair. I never could get 64 bit Windoze XP to work reliably, so all my XP machines are running 32 bit. Most of my Win 10 machines are running 64 bit. The machines that were intentionally or surreptitiously upgraded ran a mix of 32 and 64 bit Win 10. The difference in speed between 32 and 64 bit Win 10 was sufficient for me to justify loading 64bit Win 10 from scratch. So, if you're comparing the speed of XP and Win 10, you're comparing a 32 bit XP, which is limited to 3.5GB of RAM, with 64 bit Win 10 which can use far more RAM. Apples and oranges. AFAIK, when I switch on a laptop, which has no battery connected, then that qualifies as a 'cold boot'. Methinks we have different definitions of "cold boot". I'm referring to the time it takes from starting the laptop from a power off state to when it is ready to use. When you disable "fast startup", a similar hardware XP machine should boot at approximately the same speed, mostly depending on how many background programs need to be started. What the "fast startup" feature does (which incidentally is enabled by default in Windoze 10) only partly shuts down when you turn off the computah. This explains it better than I can: https://www.howtogeek.com/243901/the-pros-and-cons-of-windows-10s-fast-startup-mode/ Windoze 8.1 has the same features (which incidentally are disabled by default) but with slightly different feature names: http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/windows-and-office/how-windows-8-hybrid-shutdown-fast-boot-feature-works/ **I didn't read any of your cites (though I may do later), because, I assume, that feature doesn't apply to a laptop which has no battery installed. Feel free to correct my assumption. Opinions vary on whether "fast startup" is a good or bad thing. In general, I find it beneficial and harmless on most systems. However, about once a month, I get a customer call for various boot time errors that are eventually traced to "fast startup" and are cleared by doing a full shutdown. I also have similar problems when running Win 10 inside a virtual machine (both VMware and Virtual Box). So far, nobody has lost data, so I think you're safe to leave it running[1]. Nine different ways to do a full (and other) shutdowns in Win 10: https://www.tenforums.com/tutorials/7418-shut-down-computer-windows-10-a.html Note that if you have "fast startup" enabled, and turn off your computah, you cannot force it to do a full boot. You have to do the full shutdown first, before it will load everything from scratch. **I'll check to see if it enabled or not. If you need more detail, please ask. It's midnight and I've had a long day which included living on party food. I expect to survive but right now, my brain is almost off-line. [1] I turn off "fast startup" and sell my customers an SSD if they want more speed. In general, an SSD will make everything go 3X to 5X faster. **Sure does. I installed an SSD in my Win 7 desktop machine (first gen i5 CPU) and it hums along quite nicely. Boot times are quite respectable, but nowhere near as quick as my laptop (5th or 6th gen i5 CPU). -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au |
#18
Posted to sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
On Sat, 10 Jun 2017 19:57:55 +1000, Trevor Wilson
wrote: **You're not reading what I wrote. I do not operate my laptop with the battery installed. It operates only on mains power. It cold boots in around 30 seconds. Trust me. I even read between your lines. If your laptop is booting at what I would consider to be an unusually high speed, then something is going on to make that happen. Unfortunately, few of my Win 10 customers remove their laptop batteries when shutting down, so I don't have any personal experience in how this works. My guess(tm) is that "fast startup" does not write the entire memory image to your hard disk drive as in hibernate, but instead writes only those parts of memory that have changed since the last memory image was written. That would really speed up shutdown and startup. I'll play with it when I get back to my palatial office on Monday. Meanwhile, just try disabling "fast startup" and compare the boot times. I predict that a normal cold boot will take quite a bit a bit longer with "fast startup" disabled. **I didn't read any of your cites (though I may do later), because, I assume, that feature doesn't apply to a laptop which has no battery installed. Feel free to correct my assumption. Gladly, but not today. I need a Win 10 machine and all I have are XP, Win 7 and several Chromebooks at home. Monday or Tues please. There should also be an explanation of how "fast startup" works on the MSDN (Microsoft Developers Network). I'll see if I can find it later tonite. [1] I turn off "fast startup" and sell my customers an SSD if they want more speed. In general, an SSD will make everything go 3X to 5X faster. **Sure does. I installed an SSD in my Win 7 desktop machine (first gen i5 CPU) and it hums along quite nicely. Boot times are quite respectable, but nowhere near as quick as my laptop (5th or 6th gen i5 CPU). Win 7 does NOT have the Win 10 "fast startup" or the Win 8.1 "fast boot" feature. Unless you have hibernate enabled or have performed some of the Win 7 boot tweaks found on YouTube and elsewhere, Win 7 boots normally (cold boot) every time. -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
#19
Posted to sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
On Sat, 10 Jun 2017 08:55:26 -0700, Jeff Liebermann
wrote: Win 7 does NOT have the Win 10 "fast startup" or the Win 8.1 "fast boot" feature. Unless you have hibernate enabled or have performed some of the Win 7 boot tweaks found on YouTube and elsewhere, Win 7 boots normally (cold boot) every time. Having never used anything newer than XP, I was wondering if Win7 boots as fast as XP, or is it slower? I've never had any problems with the boot time of XP. Only once did I get a computer that booted so damn slow I reinstalled XP. I had bought a used laptop on ebay and they seller sold it with a fresh install of XP, but then he put so much anti-virus software on it, that it literally took near 5 min to boot. Once booted the thing ran so slow I could not even use it. I finally wiped the HDD and just reinstalled XP. Problem solved! |
#20
Posted to sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
On Sat, 10 Jun 2017 14:56:24 -0400, wrote:
On Sat, 10 Jun 2017 08:55:26 -0700, Jeff Liebermann wrote: Win 7 does NOT have the Win 10 "fast startup" or the Win 8.1 "fast boot" feature. Unless you have hibernate enabled or have performed some of the Win 7 boot tweaks found on YouTube and elsewhere, Win 7 boots normally (cold boot) every time. Having never used anything newer than XP, I was wondering if Win7 boots as fast as XP, or is it slower? I've been told that Win 7 is somewhat faster. As I previously mentioned, such comparisons turn into apples and oranges comparisons due to differences in hardware, differences in 32bit vs 64bit, etc. The only comparisons I find valid is when I take a single machine, and swap out two identical hard disk drives, one with XP and the other with Win 7. Also, both machines should have XP and Win 7 updated to the latest, with typical resident programs installed (virus scanner, acrobat, skype, fancy video drivers, etc). Only then will I get a valid comparison. Also, there's the question of when does one consider the boot timing to end? I usually use when task manager shows near zero CPU and disk usage. Or, maybe when the HD light almost stops flashing. That's fine, but if the machine decides to download or finish installing updates just after boot, the benchmarks get mangled. I've also seen benchmarks claiming that XP is faster than Win 7. When I dug deeper, I found that the Win 7 machine was a fully loaded production machine, while the XP machine had only the basic installation to SP3 (service pack 3) without any further updates. That's not very fair since the subsequent updates, and typical installed resident programs, really slow down XP. On a fresh install, on an Intel E8500 dual core machine, XP can easily boot in 45 seconds. However, install the mass of updates and junkware, it will slow down to about 6 minutes. Win 7 has even more updates, but the slowdown is less. For entertainment value, I just timed my HP Pavilion Elite m9077c desktop, running Win 7, quad core Q6600, 8GB RAM, Seagate 1TB drive. Well, that was a monumental waste of time. I'm at 10 minutes and the HD is furiously bashing away. I haven't had it on for about a week, so it's catching up with updates, virus scans, disk maintenance (defrag), backup to NAS, etc. All that usually takes about an hour. Maybe I'll try again later. Remind me if I forget. I've never had any problems with the boot time of XP. Only once did I get a computer that booted so damn slow I reinstalled XP. I bought both my home and office XP machines in about 2006. I loaded XP once, and have never had to reinstall XP. When I needed a larger disk drive, I would clone the old drive to the new driver, and continue merrily on my way. If you have to reinstall XP (and you're not cleaning up the mess left by a virus), then you're doing something wrong. I had bought a used laptop on ebay and they seller sold it with a fresh install of XP, but then he put so much anti-virus software on it, that it literally took near 5 min to boot. Once booted the thing ran so slow I could not even use it. I finally wiped the HDD and just reinstalled XP. Problem solved! Sure, but did you install a virus program, any virus program? Even MSE (microsoft security essentials) takes its toll on performance. Comparing performance with and without an anti-virus program isn't fair. Incidentally, I don't care much about speed when the differences are minor. Initially, most of my customers want speed and features. After the smoke clears and reality sets in, they change their mind and demand reliability at whatever speed and features will produce a reliable machine. My days of overclocking, registry tweaking, and alleged performance boosting software are long over. -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
#21
Posted to sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
On Sunday, 11 June 2017 18:01:51 UTC+1, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sat, 10 Jun 2017 14:56:24 -0400, wrote: On Sat, 10 Jun 2017 08:55:26 -0700, Jeff Liebermann wrote: Win 7 does NOT have the Win 10 "fast startup" or the Win 8.1 "fast boot" feature. Unless you have hibernate enabled or have performed some of the Win 7 boot tweaks found on YouTube and elsewhere, Win 7 boots normally (cold boot) every time. Having never used anything newer than XP, I was wondering if Win7 boots as fast as XP, or is it slower? I've been told that Win 7 is somewhat faster. As I previously mentioned, such comparisons turn into apples and oranges comparisons due to differences in hardware, differences in 32bit vs 64bit, etc. The only comparisons I find valid is when I take a single machine, and swap out two identical hard disk drives, one with XP and the other with Win 7. Also, both machines should have XP and Win 7 updated to the latest, with typical resident programs installed (virus scanner, acrobat, skype, fancy video drivers, etc). Only then will I get a valid comparison. Also, there's the question of when does one consider the boot timing to end? I usually use when task manager shows near zero CPU and disk usage. Or, maybe when the HD light almost stops flashing. That's fine, but if the machine decides to download or finish installing updates just after boot, the benchmarks get mangled. I've also seen benchmarks claiming that XP is faster than Win 7. When I dug deeper, I found that the Win 7 machine was a fully loaded production machine, while the XP machine had only the basic installation to SP3 (service pack 3) without any further updates. That's not very fair since the subsequent updates, and typical installed resident programs, really slow down XP. On a fresh install, on an Intel E8500 dual core machine, XP can easily boot in 45 seconds. However, install the mass of updates and junkware, it will slow down to about 6 minutes. Win 7 has even more updates, but the slowdown is less. For entertainment value, I just timed my HP Pavilion Elite m9077c desktop, running Win 7, quad core Q6600, 8GB RAM, Seagate 1TB drive. Well, that was a monumental waste of time. I'm at 10 minutes and the HD is furiously bashing away. I haven't had it on for about a week, so it's catching up with updates, virus scans, disk maintenance (defrag), backup to NAS, etc. All that usually takes about an hour. Maybe I'll try again later. Remind me if I forget. I've never had any problems with the boot time of XP. Only once did I get a computer that booted so damn slow I reinstalled XP. I bought both my home and office XP machines in about 2006. I loaded XP once, and have never had to reinstall XP. When I needed a larger disk drive, I would clone the old drive to the new driver, and continue merrily on my way. If you have to reinstall XP (and you're not cleaning up the mess left by a virus), then you're doing something wrong. I had bought a used laptop on ebay and they seller sold it with a fresh install of XP, but then he put so much anti-virus software on it, that it literally took near 5 min to boot. Once booted the thing ran so slow I could not even use it. I finally wiped the HDD and just reinstalled XP. Problem solved! Sure, but did you install a virus program, any virus program? Even MSE (microsoft security essentials) takes its toll on performance. Comparing performance with and without an anti-virus program isn't fair. Incidentally, I don't care much about speed when the differences are minor. Initially, most of my customers want speed and features. After the smoke clears and reality sets in, they change their mind and demand reliability at whatever speed and features will produce a reliable machine. My days of overclocking, registry tweaking, and alleged performance boosting software are long over. My slowest machine ever was a 486 that hung around long past its best before date. It never skipped a beat in its entire life, and was occasionally useful (partly to punish users that screwed machines up). I once virus scanned it - it started scanning the first file after 16 minutes! With carefully chosen apps it ran ok, though the 256 colour graphics were grim. NT |
#22
Posted to sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
On Sun, 11 Jun 2017 10:01:39 -0700, Jeff Liebermann
wrote: For entertainment value, I just timed my HP Pavilion Elite m9077c desktop, running Win 7, quad core Q6600, 8GB RAM, Seagate 1TB drive. Well, that was a monumental waste of time. I'm at 10 minutes and the HD is furiously bashing away. I haven't had it on for about a week, so it's catching up with updates, virus scans, disk maintenance (defrag), backup to NAS, etc. All that usually takes about an hour. Maybe I'll try again later. Remind me if I forget. I couldn't resist, so I ran a quick boot speed test. For timing, I used: http://stopwatch.onlineclock.net The XP box is a Dell Optiplex 960. Core 2 Duo E8500 at 3.16Hz with a 1333MHz FSB (Passmark = 2,293), with 4GBytes RAM, and a Seagate ST31000340AS 1TB drive. XP is 32 bit. The Win 7 box is an HP Pavilion Elite m9077c. Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 at 2.4GHz with a 1066MHz FSB (Passmark = 2,972), with 8GBytes RAM, and a Seagate ST31000524S 1TB drive. Win 7 is 64 bit. I started the clock at first light (when the bios screen appeared after power is turned on) and stopped when the Performance Monitor showed very little CPU or HD activity. Both machines have identical resident programs to slow things down. In this case Avast anti-virus, Skype, Google Drive, MS OneDrive, Nvidia GeForce Experience, Everything, and Teamviewer. For results, I got: Win 7: 5min 10sec. Win XP: 3min 39sec. The machines are not identical, but using what I have, XP boots 29% faster than Win 7. My guess(tm) is that I tried it again with identical CPU's, the boot times would be closer. Now for a something a little different. Let's see how fast my shiny new Chromebook boots. It doesn't run Windoze, so there's no sense in trying to load it down with things to slow it down. It's an Acer CB3-431-C5EX. Refurbished from the eBay Acer Store at: http://www.ebay.com/itm/252557970886 1.4GHz Intel N3160 quad core, 4GB RAM, 32GB SSD. I'm running the IPS screen at 1536x864, but it will go up to 2400x1350. For cold boot time, I got 24 seconds, starting with power on, and ending when the Chrome browser reloaded the mess of web pages I was looking at when I turned it off. That also includes hitting ctrlD on startup to get past the developers mode warning, and logging in with my Google password. Add another 8 seconds to start the Android on ChromeOS script, and 3 seconds to login again. So, if you really want boot speed (like I do when going to a coffee shop, meeting, event, or need a quick Google search, get a Chromebook. -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
#23
Posted to sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
On Sun, 11 Jun 2017 12:17:14 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
My slowest machine ever was a 486 that hung around long past its best before date. It never skipped a beat in its entire life, and was occasionally useful (partly to punish users that screwed machines up). I once virus scanned it - it started scanning the first file after 16 minutes! With carefully chosen apps it ran ok, though the 256 colour graphics were grim. NT I have to guess the dates, but I think between 1987 and 2014, I ran a Xenix mail server in my palatial office on a 486DX2-66 system with 4MBytes (that's MegaBytes, not GigaBytes) RAM, 1GB Conner CFP-1060S SCSI hard disk, and an assortment of tape drives and SCSI peripherals. At various points during its 27 year life, I replaced the motherboard once, power supply twice, and video card thrice, but never reloaded the Xenix operating system. If you don't mind character based computing from the command line, the machine ran just fine and was very fast for most things. I kept waiting for the machine to die so would have an excuse to replace it with something more modern, but it just wouldn't die. So, I killed it and gave it a proper funeral at the local recycler. Also, I used to maintain some CNC controllers, that ran commodity 486 motherboards behind the fancy exterior. Until recently, I had a fairly good stock of replacement 486 motherboards, EISA, ISA, VESA, and VL bus cards for fixing these. -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
#24
Posted to sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
On 12/06/2017 7:16 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sun, 11 Jun 2017 10:01:39 -0700, Jeff Liebermann wrote: For entertainment value, I just timed my HP Pavilion Elite m9077c desktop, running Win 7, quad core Q6600, 8GB RAM, Seagate 1TB drive. Well, that was a monumental waste of time. I'm at 10 minutes and the HD is furiously bashing away. I haven't had it on for about a week, so it's catching up with updates, virus scans, disk maintenance (defrag), backup to NAS, etc. All that usually takes about an hour. Maybe I'll try again later. Remind me if I forget. I couldn't resist, so I ran a quick boot speed test. For timing, I used: http://stopwatch.onlineclock.net The XP box is a Dell Optiplex 960. Core 2 Duo E8500 at 3.16Hz with a 1333MHz FSB (Passmark = 2,293), with 4GBytes RAM, and a Seagate ST31000340AS 1TB drive. XP is 32 bit. The Win 7 box is an HP Pavilion Elite m9077c. Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 at 2.4GHz with a 1066MHz FSB (Passmark = 2,972), with 8GBytes RAM, and a Seagate ST31000524S 1TB drive. Win 7 is 64 bit. I started the clock at first light (when the bios screen appeared after power is turned on) and stopped when the Performance Monitor showed very little CPU or HD activity. Both machines have identical resident programs to slow things down. In this case Avast anti-virus, Skype, Google Drive, MS OneDrive, Nvidia GeForce Experience, Everything, and Teamviewer. For results, I got: Win 7: 5min 10sec. Win XP: 3min 39sec. **Bloody Hell, that is slow. I haven't timed my Win 7 box recently, but it is fully stuffed with software I never use. I stuck a 240GB SSD in there for it to boot from and it is quick. Very quick. If I had to guess, I'd say around 1 minute. That is for a first gen i5 CPU, 64 bit Win 7, 16GB RAM. Not as fast as my Win 10 lappy, but then the lappy has hardly anything on it to slow it down. I timed the Win 10 lappy yesterday. 21 seconds from boot to being able to browse the net. -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au |
#25
Posted to sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
On Mon, 12 Jun 2017 09:28:52 +1000, Trevor Wilson
wrote: On 12/06/2017 7:16 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote: For results, I got: Win 7: 5min 10sec. Win XP: 3min 39sec. **Bloody Hell, that is slow. Yep. The Optiplex 960 was introduced in late 2008. The HP Pavilion Elite m9077c was introduced in Sept 2007. Both use DDR2 RAM and SATA2 HD's. That's 9 and 10 years old respectively. Needless to mention, if you want something faster, buy something newer with SATA3 or SSD, DDR3 or 4, and faster CPU's with larger L2 caches. Also, with an SSD, you can reliably and effectively use a HD write cache, such as Samsung TurboWrite: http://www.anandtech.com/show/8747/samsung-ssd-850-evo-review/2 for a big speed boots. I don't have numbers handy, but for boot speed, I saw about a 2:1 improvement with the write cache. I haven't timed my Win 7 box recently, but it is fully stuffed with software I never use. I stuck a 240GB SSD in there for it to boot from and it is quick. Very quick. If I had to guess, I'd say around 1 minute. That's about right for an SSD. As I previously mumbled, adding an SSD give about a 3x to 5x overall speed boost (without the Win 8.1/10 fast startup feature). That is for a first gen i5 CPU, 64 bit Win 7, 16GB RAM. Not as fast as my Win 10 lappy, but then the lappy has hardly anything on it to slow it down. I timed the Win 10 lappy yesterday. 21 seconds from boot to being able to browse the net. 3rd time: Try it with "fast startup" disabled. You're not benchmarking the speed of the machine, but the speed improvement of "fast startup" (also known as hybrid shutdown and hybrid boot). I promised to post something from MSDN on how "fast startup" works. I couldn't find much specific to Win 10. I eventually determined that although the name changed from "fast boot" to "fast startup" between Win 8.1 and Win 10, it's basically the same thing. Some stuff worth skimming: Designing for PCs that boot faster than ever before https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/b8/2012/05/22/designing-for-pcs-that-boot-faster-than-ever-before/ How to Turn On or Off Fast Startup in Windows 10 https://www.tenforums.com/tutorials/4189-turn-off-fast-startup-windows-10-a.html Notice the drawing at the beginning showing what is loaded on boot and how "fast startup" has much less to load. Windows 8: Fast Boot https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/olivnie/2012/12/14/windows-8-fast-boot/ -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
#26
Posted to sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
On Sunday, 11 June 2017 22:32:33 UTC+1, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sun, 11 Jun 2017 12:17:14 -0700 (PDT), tabbypurr wrote: My slowest machine ever was a 486 that hung around long past its best before date. It never skipped a beat in its entire life, and was occasionally useful (partly to punish users that screwed machines up). I once virus scanned it - it started scanning the first file after 16 minutes! With carefully chosen apps it ran ok, though the 256 colour graphics were grim. NT I have to guess the dates, but I think between 1987 and 2014, I ran a Xenix mail server in my palatial office on a 486DX2-66 system with 4MBytes (that's MegaBytes, not GigaBytes) RAM, 1GB Conner CFP-1060S SCSI hard disk, and an assortment of tape drives and SCSI peripherals. At various points during its 27 year life, I replaced the motherboard once, power supply twice, and video card thrice, but never reloaded the Xenix operating system. If you don't mind character based computing from the command line, the machine ran just fine and was very fast for most things. I kept waiting for the machine to die so would have an excuse to replace it with something more modern, but it just wouldn't die. So, I killed it and gave it a proper funeral at the local recycler. Also, I used to maintain some CNC controllers, that ran commodity 486 motherboards behind the fancy exterior. Until recently, I had a fairly good stock of replacement 486 motherboards, EISA, ISA, VESA, and VL bus cards for fixing these. Anything can run command line & single app, even an Apple II. Add multitasking & GUI and it's another story. I had an impressive 24M RAM, but ISTR the HDD was just 100s of M. So many times I hoped it would die. So did people that used it. But it never did. Many more modern PCs came & died, but not that 486. I guess you got a better machine when they cost well over £1000 new. NT |
#27
Posted to sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
On Monday, 12 June 2017 00:29:00 UTC+1, Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 12/06/2017 7:16 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote: On Sun, 11 Jun 2017 10:01:39 -0700, Jeff Liebermann For results, I got: Win 7: 5min 10sec. Win XP: 3min 39sec. **Bloody Hell, that is slow. I haven't timed my Win 7 box recently, but it is fully stuffed with software I never use. I stuck a 240GB SSD in there for it to boot from and it is quick. Very quick. If I had to guess, I'd say around 1 minute. That is for a first gen i5 CPU, 64 bit Win 7, 16GB RAM. Not as fast as my Win 10 lappy, but then the lappy has hardly anything on it to slow it down. I timed the Win 10 lappy yesterday. 21 seconds from boot to being able to browse the net. This old dual core is 10 yrs old now. It boots in under a minute. I'm grateful I don't run windows. NT |
#28
Posted to sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
On Sun, 11 Jun 2017 17:55:19 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
Anything can run command line & single app, even an Apple II. Add multitasking & GUI and it's another story. Reminds me of a funny story from way back. Microsoft released Windoze 2.0 with a new feature, cooperative multitasking. Included was a rotating wire frame graphic intended to show that it was possible to run multiple copies of the program in separate windows. The problem was that each additional copy of the program required more overhead than it saved. As I vaguely recall, it took 150% more time to run time to run a 2nd copy of a program. It was faster to run one program at a time than to use the cooperative multitasking. Run enough copies and the machine would grind to a halt. MS solved the problem by removing the demo program. I had an impressive 24M RAM, but ISTR the HDD was just 100s of M. So many times I hoped it would die. So did people that used it. But it never did. Many more modern PCs came & died, but not that 486. I guess you got a better machine when they cost well over £1000 new. ISTR that I paid almost $1000 for that 1GB hard disk. However, you don't have to worry any more about keeping a machine or operating system alive for 20+ years. The new and improved paradigm is that nothing is expected to last more than 5.0 years. https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201624 MS does it a little better, but not much: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/13853/windows-lifecycle-fact-sheet Maybe Windoze 10 will have a "Best used before Oct 13, 2020" sticker on the box? -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
#29
Posted to sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
On Sun, 11 Jun 2017 17:59:21 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
This old dual core is 10 yrs old now. It boots in under a minute. I'm grateful I don't run windows. One minute is too slow: "How To Boot Linux In Under One Second" http://www.electronicdesign.com/embedded/how-boot-linux-under-one-second https://www.logicpd.com/news/logic-pd-to-present-at-battery-power-2012-2/ Mo https://www.google.com/search?q=logic+pd+fast+boot -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
#30
Posted to sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
On 6/11/2017 9:54 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
"How To Boot Linux In Under One Second" That's really not an issue. I've NEVER had to reboot Linux. -- Jeff-1.0 wa6fwi http://www.foxsmercantile.com --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com |
#31
Posted to sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
On Sun, 11 Jun 2017 22:02:51 -0500, Foxs Mercantile
wrote: On 6/11/2017 9:54 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote: "How To Boot Linux In Under One Second" That's really not an issue. I've NEVER had to reboot Linux. Novell 3.12 did it better: https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/03/epic-uptime-achievement-can-you-beat-16-years/ Would you believe 16 years uptime? -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
#32
Posted to sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
On Sun, 11 Jun 2017 10:01:39 -0700, Jeff Liebermann
wrote: For entertainment value, I just timed my HP Pavilion Elite m9077c desktop, running Win 7, quad core Q6600, 8GB RAM, Seagate 1TB drive. Well, that was a monumental waste of time. I'm at 10 minutes and the HD is furiously bashing away. I haven't had it on for about a week, so it's catching up with updates, virus scans, disk maintenance (defrag), backup to NAS, etc. All that usually takes about an hour. Maybe I'll try again later. Remind me if I forget. If you're letting all those updates occur, that is no comparison at all. Shut off Updates, then check the timing. I never allow anything to automatically update. That's just plain risky, not6 to mention those updates always occur at the worst possible time. If I feel the need for upgrades, I do it manually, when I want to. I CONTROL MY COMPUTER, IT DONT CONTROL ME! |
#33
Posted to sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
On 12/06/2017 10:44 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jun 2017 09:28:52 +1000, Trevor Wilson wrote: On 12/06/2017 7:16 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote: For results, I got: Win 7: 5min 10sec. Win XP: 3min 39sec. **Bloody Hell, that is slow. Yep. The Optiplex 960 was introduced in late 2008. The HP Pavilion Elite m9077c was introduced in Sept 2007. Both use DDR2 RAM and SATA2 HD's. That's 9 and 10 years old respectively. Needless to mention, if you want something faster, buy something newer with SATA3 or SSD, DDR3 or 4, and faster CPU's with larger L2 caches. Also, with an SSD, you can reliably and effectively use a HD write cache, such as Samsung TurboWrite: http://www.anandtech.com/show/8747/samsung-ssd-850-evo-review/2 for a big speed boots. I don't have numbers handy, but for boot speed, I saw about a 2:1 improvement with the write cache. I haven't timed my Win 7 box recently, but it is fully stuffed with software I never use. I stuck a 240GB SSD in there for it to boot from and it is quick. Very quick. If I had to guess, I'd say around 1 minute. That's about right for an SSD. As I previously mumbled, adding an SSD give about a 3x to 5x overall speed boost (without the Win 8.1/10 fast startup feature). That is for a first gen i5 CPU, 64 bit Win 7, 16GB RAM. Not as fast as my Win 10 lappy, but then the lappy has hardly anything on it to slow it down. I timed the Win 10 lappy yesterday. 21 seconds from boot to being able to browse the net. 3rd time: Try it with "fast startup" disabled. You're not benchmarking the speed of the machine, but the speed improvement of "fast startup" (also known as hybrid shutdown and hybrid boot). I promised to post something from MSDN on how "fast startup" works. I couldn't find much specific to Win 10. I eventually determined that although the name changed from "fast boot" to "fast startup" between Win 8.1 and Win 10, it's basically the same thing. Some stuff worth skimming: Designing for PCs that boot faster than ever before https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/b8/2012/05/22/designing-for-pcs-that-boot-faster-than-ever-before/ How to Turn On or Off Fast Startup in Windows 10 https://www.tenforums.com/tutorials/4189-turn-off-fast-startup-windows-10-a.html Notice the drawing at the beginning showing what is loaded on boot and how "fast startup" has much less to load. Windows 8: Fast Boot https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/olivnie/2012/12/14/windows-8-fast-boot/ **You are correct. With fast boot disabled, my Win 10 lappy boots in around 1 min 30 sec. -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au |
#34
Posted to sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
On Sun, 11 Jun 2017, Foxs Mercantile wrote:
On 6/11/2017 9:54 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote: "How To Boot Linux In Under One Second" That's really not an issue. I've NEVER had to reboot Linux. The power didn't suddenly go out? You didn't need to add hardware? The hardware was temporarily flakey? The computer was overheating? Right at the beginning, 2001, I did tend to turn it off, so there was a lot of rebooting and the things done overnight didn't get done. But after a while, I did pretty much leave it on all the time, and except for the things mentioned above, it can remain on almost forever ("almost" because usually one of those things kick in so I do have to reboot). When I moved to this computer, I left the other one on. About six months later I remembered, and it was all fine, though I did turn it off at that point. Michael |
#35
Posted to sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
The average quiescent computer, screen off, uses about 60 watts of power. Around here, power is $0.14/kwh, so that comes to about $74 per year.
The average LED screen uses about 100 watts of power, the average working computer about 125 watts. So, at say.... 10 hours per day, that might come to an additional $114 or so - discounting the 60 watts already buried, somewhat less. Not even a US dollar per day. Peter Wieck Melrose Park, PA |
#36
Posted to sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
On 6/12/2017 2:40 PM, Michael Black wrote:
The power didn't suddenly go out? You didn't need to add hardware? The hardware was temporarily flakey? The computer was overheating? Perhaps I should have said, "Not unless I chose to." The UPS solved the power glitch problems. The only time I had to reboot the box was when I added a DVD player to it. That was once in 4 years of up time. I had zero problems with the box. None of the usual, "You changed something? Reboot..." That Microsoft liked to play every time you turned around. -- Jeff-1.0 wa6fwi http://www.foxsmercantile.com --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com |
#37
Posted to sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
(OT) Would you pay $99.99 for a USED 1gb Flash Drive
On Mon, 12 Jun 2017, Foxs Mercantile wrote:
On 6/12/2017 2:40 PM, Michael Black wrote: The power didn't suddenly go out? You didn't need to add hardware? The hardware was temporarily flakey? The computer was overheating? Perhaps I should have said, "Not unless I chose to." The UPS solved the power glitch problems. The only time I had to reboot the box was when I added a DVD player to it. That was once in 4 years of up time. I had zero problems with the box. None of the usual, "You changed something? Reboot..." That Microsoft liked to play every time you turned around. I did know what you really meant. Oddly enough, with it being the hottest day here so far this year, my computer actually shutdown. Michael |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Why does Ubuntu show 1GB more storage space than Android has? | Electronics Repair | |||
If you are looking to build a full wardrobe and you have a limitedbudget, consider shopping in used clothing stores. Used clothing stores offera variety of clothing at affordable prices. You can shop for used clothing inphysical stores or online. | Woodworking | |||
If you have a closet full of clothes that you would like to sell,consider using an online auction site or consignment store to sell them tointerested consumers. Online auction sites will sell your used clothes to thehighest bidder and will require yo | UK diy | |||
240 songs 1GB to so, put your shuffle Clip | Home Repair | |||
What would you pay for a jointer fence? | Woodworking |